[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: early review of RH 9 (Shrike)

On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Matthew Miller wrote:

>> What, exactly, would they have licensed?  The GPL forbids distribution 
>> of software that would place encumberances upon the recipients, which 
>> Thompson's patents do.  All common mp3 software is available only under 
>> the GPL.
>It might be possible with enough money to get a license for any/all GPLed
>software. This would result in a situation like that of QT -- if you want to
>make proprietary software, you'd still have to buy your own license. This is
>maybe improbable now, but as the technology gets older, it could happen.

Sure, it is likely possible for _someone_ to persue such a
license grant.  Nobody is likely to do it until there is a
business case for it that would have a direct perceived return on
investment from doing so.

With ogg being a superior technology from a technical as well as
ideological perspective, and considering what the predominant use
of MP3 technology really is, I would find it very difficult to
come up with a business case for this.

Mike A. Harris     ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris
OS Systems Engineer - XFree86 maintainer - Red Hat

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]